Canada seeks to join non-nuclear pillar of AUKUS alliance

[Admiral Beez]

New Zealand might want to join too.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/mar/28/new-zealand-may-join-aukus-pacts-non-nuclear-component

I can foresee an unfortunate acronym, CANZUKUS. Sung to Hammer Time.

 

[machine shop tom]

I'm sure we can easily build submarines that can stay under water forever.

That was accomplished long ago. The key is to make that an option, not an end.

 

[GreenKnight121]

Thyssenkrupp can publish all the self serving press releases they want, but I believe their small 56 meter, 1,500 ton (surfaced) boats are more suited to the Baltic or Med than the three oceans Canada must patrol. The Type 212 is significantly smaller than the RCN's current 70 meter, 2,400 ton Victoria class.

View attachment 719999

OK - so how about a Canadian version of Thyssenkrupp's U218SG?

1 completed, 2 scheduled for completion this year, and 1 scheduled for completion in 2024 for Singapore.

Displacement 2,000 t (2,000 long tons) Surfaced; 2,200 t (2,200 long tons) Submerged.

Endurance 28–42 days (4-6 weeks) days underwater, without snorkeling (thanks to AIP).

 

[GTX]

Pillar 2 of AUKUS is potentially more interesting:

The AUKUS Alliance Has a Lot More to Offer Than Submarines

However, Pillar II of the AUKUS—which promises cooperation on AI, hypersonics, quantum computing and other advanced technologies—could significantly strengthen the U.S. position in the Asia Pacific.

www.cfr.org

 

[Zipper730]

I remember hearing somewhere that the USSR during the Cold War had Brazil as being on the target list because it was allied to the US and had some ports that we could conceivably use. Based on that logic, wouldn't having every nation on the list build a nuclear weapon to ensure that whoever nukes them dies?

 

[WARSPITER]

Pillar 2 of AUKUS is potentially more interesting:

The AUKUS Alliance Has a Lot More to Offer Than Submarines

However, Pillar II of the AUKUS—which promises cooperation on AI, hypersonics, quantum computing and other advanced technologies—could significantly strengthen the U.S. position in the Asia Pacific.

www.cfr.org

That's definitely the point here. Having the same weapons systems etc between countries is big advantage. If one country comes up
with a good upgrade the others get it too.

Maintenance facilities in different countries being able to service each others systems gives a spread of locations rather than having to send
everything over long distances.

Australia now has facilities to refurbish Abrams tank engines instead of the months of turnaround required to use US facilities. The engine
sensor systems added in Australia let maintenance crews know how the mechanicals are going at all times, rather than waiting until something
cacks itself. This system is easily added to US models thus enhancing them too. Similar adds would occur for the submarine fleet under the
AUKUS agreement.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Canada not likely to be invited. Ignoring defence spending has consequences.

No plans to invite Canada to join AUKUS: White House

U.S. National Security Council spokesperson John Kirby says there are no plans to re-evaluate the makeup of AUKUS — a trilateral security pact between Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States — to include Canada.

www.ctvnews.ca

 

[Admiral Beez]

OK - so how about a Canadian version of Thyssenkrupp's U218SG?

1 completed, 2 scheduled for completion this year, and 1 scheduled for completion in 2024 for Singapore.

Displacement 2,000 t (2,000 long tons) Surfaced; 2,200 t (2,200 long tons) Submerged.

Endurance 28–42 days (4-6 weeks) days underwater, without snorkeling (thanks to AIP).

Good plan. Replace the Victorias with AIP SSKs like the U218G in 2030 and add SSNs in 2040.

No nation in the world needs nuclear submarines more than Canada does

If Brazil, with the same GDP can have SSNs, so can Canada.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Some progress.

DND Releases RFI for Canadian Patrol Submarine Project (CPSP) with Responses Due by November 18th - Canadian Defence Review

Canada officially released an RFI to industry for the Canadian Patrol Submarine Project. It’s been reported that the RCN is readying itself for the purchase of up to 12 new submarines at a cost of $60 billion, according to National Defence and industry sources.

canadiandefencereview.com

 

[GTX]

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXadYulrSt4

 

[GTX]

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QUrk80itYWc

 

[MIflyer]

I never understood why there was US Govt opposition to Canada acquiring nuke propelled subs back in the 1980's. You need nuke subs if you are going to operate under the ice and why the US Govt should oppose that, I have no idea. Admittedly there is some history of Canada letting classified information slip out, but it is not like nuke powered subs are that radically new a weapon.

 

[Admiral Beez]

I never understood why there was US Govt opposition to Canada acquiring nuke propelled subs back in the 1980's.

One large reason was that the USN wanted its nuclear boats to transit Canadian waters without permission or detection. There are several other factors, outlined below:

https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA437607.pdf

"In addition to the dispute over territorial waters, the Navy particularly wanted to avoid the possibility of having to conduct combined submarine operations under the Arctic. In short, it wanted to preserve the condition that it had always enjoyed,--knowing that apart from its own subs, all unknown submarine contacts under the arctic ice would be Soviet"